I have noticed a certain trend in military rifles.Alot of them seem to have things added on and are kind of heavy.The Styer AUG is 7.9 lbs,the M16A2 is about 8.5 fully loaded(30 rounds) and the FAMAS G2 is 8.1 lbs.All of you probably know this but I was just wondering if some of the stuff is really needed.The AK types are about 6 lbs and seem to work good,even if they arent the most accurate.Not that Im compaining about the weight of M16 types,I love the feel of mine,I'm just wondering.
Thanks,Tyler Gorski.

I think the rifles are made sort of roburst because of the work they are intended for. I asked once why did military rifles have wood out to the muzzle? The answer was so you wouldn't burn your fingers on the barrel when you used the rifle to club someone in the head.

so you can hurt the guy you hit it with.......

with the weight also comes a measure of stability, if your breathing hard its a slight bit more accurate...

Any rifle less than 6-8 pounds usually is very hard to shoot offhand or unsupported unless the design is something out of the ordinary. You generally need that much weight to allow you to settle it down to take accurate aim. I watched a guy at the range with a remington 700 titanium and he was all flustered shooting if offhand, but once he benched it, he was very happy, he was going right to the gun shop to buy a bipod for it because it was too light for shooting without some support.

O.K.,but what about the bullpups(FAMAS,AUG),they are lots of polymer,especially the AUG,yet still are 8 lbs.And if thae extra weight helps for aiming,than the new XM8,which is 20% lighter than an M4,will be harder to shoot well right?Or am I missing something?And the whack someone up-side the head thing,I havent seen that since,well,never.Oh well,I guess you might need to sometime,but....oh well.Thanks for the info.If you wanna add anything I will be happy to read it.
Thanks,Tyler Gorski.

It's a trade-off, as ever. Lighter guns recoil harder so are more difficult to control, especially in full-auto.

Much of the weight increase of modern kit seems to be what they hang onto the guns, though. Optical sights are increasingly popular, but they aren't light.

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and Discussion forum

And they probably equal out fully loaded, an M-16 30 round magazine & 30 rounds of 5.56 weighing much less than an AK mag and 30 rounds of 7.62

A 5.56 round weighs 182 grains, a 7.62x39 weighs 250 grains (on my scale). For 30 rounds this works out to .78 and 1.07 lbs respectively. A difference of just a snitch over 3 oz.

Not a big diference at all.

Ak mags themself (empty) weigh more than m-16 mags.



Add that. time howeever many magazines you likely to be humping on your person at one time.

I once owned an M1 that was all stock GI, and it weighed 11 pounds with a leather sling and full magazine! A lot of M14's turned out top be a lot heavier than the nominal 8.5 pounds they were supposed to weigh! So heavy military rifles is nothing new! The M16's were lighter, but as you mentioned, they started hanging a lot of junk on them, and the result was they were about as bad as an M14 when the grenade launcher was added!